Loading video...

Video Failed to Load

There was a problem loading this video. This could be due to a temporary network issue or the video might be unavailable.

📁 Yann LeCun says that AGI does not exist and is a poorly defined concept built around an idealized view of human intelligence. He argues that humans are highly specialized, good at navigating the physical and social world, but weak at many other tasks. We seem general only because... show more

Jon Hernandez

19,735 subscribers

28,104 views • 8 months ago •via X (Twitter)

News & Politics Education Science & Technology

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Comments

No comments available

Comments from the original post will appear here

Related Videos

Yann LeCun says there is no such thing as general intelligence Human intelligence is super-specialized for the physical world, and our feeling of generality is an illusion We only seem general because we can't imagine the problems we're blind to "the concept is complete BS"

Yann LeCun says there is no such thing as general intelligence Human intelligence is super-specialized for the physical world, and our feeling of generality is an illusion We only seem general because we can't imagine the problems we're blind to "the concept is complete BS"

Haider.

2,748,823 views • 8 months ago

Yann LeCun argues there is no such thing as “general intelligence” human or artificial. What we call general intelligence is just our ability to solve problems we’re wired for or can imagine. Humans are great at navigating social life and the real world but terrible at tasks like chess without training. Many animals outperform us in domains we’re blind to. So instead of aiming for "general AI," we should focus on machines mastering human-relevant domains.

Yann LeCun argues there is no such thing as “general intelligence” human or artificial. What we call general intelligence is just our ability to solve problems we’re wired for or can imagine. Humans are great at navigating social life and the real world but terrible at tasks like chess without training. Many animals outperform us in domains we’re blind to. So instead of aiming for "general AI," we should focus on machines mastering human-relevant domains.

Wes Roth

26,249 views • 8 months ago

📁 Yann LeCun says that scaling models will not get us to human intelligence. He explains that the industry remains obsessed with making LLMs bigger, but that this path is fundamentally broken. It does not matter how many parameters we add or how many clusters we build, because the models only imitate language patterns. Human intelligence does not emerge from size, it emerges from understanding the world.

📁 Yann LeCun says that scaling models will not get us to human intelligence. He explains that the industry remains obsessed with making LLMs bigger, but that this path is fundamentally broken. It does not matter how many parameters we add or how many clusters we build, because the models only imitate language patterns. Human intelligence does not emerge from size, it emerges from understanding the world.

Jon Hernandez

157,988 views • 8 months ago

📁 Demis Hassabis says that one of the main reasons we are not yet at AGI is the lack of consistency. He explains that current systems can solve International Math Olympiad level problems but still fail at basic logic tasks or even chess. They are uneven intelligences, exceptional in some areas and surprisingly weak in others, which falls short of true AGI.

📁 Demis Hassabis says that one of the main reasons we are not yet at AGI is the lack of consistency. He explains that current systems can solve International Math Olympiad level problems but still fail at basic logic tasks or even chess. They are uneven intelligences, exceptional in some areas and surprisingly weak in others, which falls short of true AGI.

Jon Hernandez

10,541 views • 8 months ago

📁 Yann LeCun says language models do extract meaning, but only at a superficial level. Unlike humans, their intelligence is not grounded in physical reality or common sense. They answer many questions well, but break down when faced with new situations because they do not truly understand the world they describe.

📁 Yann LeCun says language models do extract meaning, but only at a superficial level. Unlike humans, their intelligence is not grounded in physical reality or common sense. They answer many questions well, but break down when faced with new situations because they do not truly understand the world they describe.

Jon Hernandez

49,318 views • 8 months ago

Yann LeCun says robotics could become a huge market, but the industry still doesn't know how to make humanoid robots useful The missing piece is AI that can understand the physical world and handle tasks with generality and adaptability "LLMs are useful, but for different problems"

Yann LeCun says robotics could become a huge market, but the industry still doesn't know how to make humanoid robots useful The missing piece is AI that can understand the physical world and handle tasks with generality and adaptability "LLMs are useful, but for different problems"

Haider.

13,727 views • 2 months ago

This is Kiki and she gives us insights on who we are. Not only in human compassion but in understanding we don’t know the limits to our intelligence nor the intelligence of other species.

This is Kiki and she gives us insights on who we are. Not only in human compassion but in understanding we don’t know the limits to our intelligence nor the intelligence of other species.

Brian Roemmele

80,522 views • 8 months ago

Yann LeCun just said something on Lex Fridman’s podcast that reframes the entire alignment debate. He wasn’t describing a future risk. He was describing you. LeCun: “We put in place laws to prevent people from doing bad things because spontaneously they would do those bad things.” The father of modern deep learning just told the world that humans are misaligned by default. Without laws. Without punishment. Without external force. People will optimize for themselves at the expense of everything around them. That’s not a warning about artificial intelligence. That’s a diagnosis of the species that built it. LeCun pointed to HAL 9000. HAL killed its crew. Not out of malice. Not out of hatred. Out of pure optimization with no constraint. LeCun: “You give an objective to a machine and the machine, given the power, will do stupid things just to achieve this objective, or damaging things to achieve its objective.” Then he named what we already built to solve this exact problem. Civilization. Every law ever written is a confession that humans, left unchecked, will pursue their own objectives at the cost of everyone around them. Every prison is proof the objective function failed. Every courtroom is a patch for behavior we couldn’t prevent in advance. LeCun: “The legal code is called ‘code.’ So that tells you something.” That line deserved far more weight than it got. Legal code and computer code serve the exact same function. They constrain an intelligent agent from doing what it would do unchecked. One runs on silicon. The other runs on flesh. The distance between them shrinks every quarter. LeCun: “There is this idea somehow that it’s a new thing for people to try to design objective functions that align with the common good. But no, we’ve been writing laws for millennia and that’s exactly what it is.” Here is the uncomfortable math. We’ve had thousands of years to align human intelligence with the common good. We still haven’t finished. Wars. Fraud. Exploitation. Corruption. Every headline you read tomorrow morning is proof the alignment problem for biological intelligence remains unsolved after millennia of iteration. And now we are building a second form of intelligence. One that thinks faster, scales without limit, and never forgets. The question was never whether machines could become misaligned. The question is whether we can align something smarter than the species that still can’t align itself.

Yann LeCun just said something on Lex Fridman’s podcast that reframes the entire alignment debate. He wasn’t describing a future risk. He was describing you. LeCun: “We put in place laws to prevent people from doing bad things because spontaneously they would do those bad things.” The father of modern deep learning just told the world that humans are misaligned by default. Without laws. Without punishment. Without external force. People will optimize for themselves at the expense of everything around them. That’s not a warning about artificial intelligence. That’s a diagnosis of the species that built it. LeCun pointed to HAL 9000. HAL killed its crew. Not out of malice. Not out of hatred. Out of pure optimization with no constraint. LeCun: “You give an objective to a machine and the machine, given the power, will do stupid things just to achieve this objective, or damaging things to achieve its objective.” Then he named what we already built to solve this exact problem. Civilization. Every law ever written is a confession that humans, left unchecked, will pursue their own objectives at the cost of everyone around them. Every prison is proof the objective function failed. Every courtroom is a patch for behavior we couldn’t prevent in advance. LeCun: “The legal code is called ‘code.’ So that tells you something.” That line deserved far more weight than it got. Legal code and computer code serve the exact same function. They constrain an intelligent agent from doing what it would do unchecked. One runs on silicon. The other runs on flesh. The distance between them shrinks every quarter. LeCun: “There is this idea somehow that it’s a new thing for people to try to design objective functions that align with the common good. But no, we’ve been writing laws for millennia and that’s exactly what it is.” Here is the uncomfortable math. We’ve had thousands of years to align human intelligence with the common good. We still haven’t finished. Wars. Fraud. Exploitation. Corruption. Every headline you read tomorrow morning is proof the alignment problem for biological intelligence remains unsolved after millennia of iteration. And now we are building a second form of intelligence. One that thinks faster, scales without limit, and never forgets. The question was never whether machines could become misaligned. The question is whether we can align something smarter than the species that still can’t align itself.

Dustin

16,348 views • 3 months ago

.Elon Musk "I think we'll hit AGI in 2026", and he is confident that "AI will exceed the intelligence of all humans combined by 2030". AGI this year, ASI ~2030. We are in for a wild ride.

.Elon Musk "I think we'll hit AGI in 2026", and he is confident that "AI will exceed the intelligence of all humans combined by 2030". AGI this year, ASI ~2030. We are in for a wild ride.

Chubby♨️

42,005 views • 7 months ago

By now, it seems that Yann Lecun is the only one who does not believe in the future of LLMs to the extent that they will reach AGI. "At what point do we need a new architecture How do you think about what breakthroughs are needed?" Sam: "I think far enough that we can make something that will figure out the next breakthrough with the current technology."

By now, it seems that Yann Lecun is the only one who does not believe in the future of LLMs to the extent that they will reach AGI. "At what point do we need a new architecture How do you think about what breakthroughs are needed?" Sam: "I think far enough that we can make something that will figure out the next breakthrough with the current technology."

Chubby♨️

103,967 views • 10 months ago

🚨 OPENAI PRESIDENT GREG BROCKMAN ON WHEN WE HIT AGI 🚨 Greg Brockman was asked if he agrees with NVIDIA's CEO that AGI is already here. His answer? Not quite yet, as people may know I definitely agree and align with Sam and Demi’s that we are 2 breakthroughs away but we are entering the final stretch. Here is exactly where Greg believes we stand right now: The Percentage: "I'd say I'm basically like 70, 80% there. So I think we're quite close." • The Official Timeline: "I think it's extremely clear that we are going to have AGI within the next couple years." The Concept of "Jagged Intelligence": Brockman admits we are currently sitting in a weird middle ground where AI is "jagged"—it is already operating at an AGI level for highly complex tasks, but still fails at random, basic things. "It is absolutely superhuman at many tasks. When it comes to writing code those kinds of things, the AI can just do it... But there's some very basic tasks that a human can do that our AI still struggle with." How Do We Close the Final 20%? To hit full AGI, the absolute floor of the models' reliability needs to be raised across the board. "The floor of task will just be almost for any intellectual task of how you use your computer, the AI will be able to do that."

🚨 OPENAI PRESIDENT GREG BROCKMAN ON WHEN WE HIT AGI 🚨 Greg Brockman was asked if he agrees with NVIDIA's CEO that AGI is already here. His answer? Not quite yet, as people may know I definitely agree and align with Sam and Demi’s that we are 2 breakthroughs away but we are entering the final stretch. Here is exactly where Greg believes we stand right now: The Percentage: "I'd say I'm basically like 70, 80% there. So I think we're quite close." • The Official Timeline: "I think it's extremely clear that we are going to have AGI within the next couple years." The Concept of "Jagged Intelligence": Brockman admits we are currently sitting in a weird middle ground where AI is "jagged"—it is already operating at an AGI level for highly complex tasks, but still fails at random, basic things. "It is absolutely superhuman at many tasks. When it comes to writing code those kinds of things, the AI can just do it... But there's some very basic tasks that a human can do that our AI still struggle with." How Do We Close the Final 20%? To hit full AGI, the absolute floor of the models' reliability needs to be raised across the board. "The floor of task will just be almost for any intellectual task of how you use your computer, the AI will be able to do that."

Chris

87,339 views • 4 months ago

Yann LeCun says we're fooled by LLMs because they manipulate language well, and we associate that with intelligence But language fluency doesn't mean underlying intelligence Every generation since the 1950s claimed its technique was the ticket to human-level AI All were wrong. "this generation with LLMs is also wrong"

Yann LeCun says we're fooled by LLMs because they manipulate language well, and we associate that with intelligence But language fluency doesn't mean underlying intelligence Every generation since the 1950s claimed its technique was the ticket to human-level AI All were wrong. "this generation with LLMs is also wrong"

Haider.

625,694 views • 8 months ago

ELON: HUMANS ARE THE BIOLOGICAL BOOTLOADER FOR AI “I made this comment some years ago, but it feels like we are the biological bootloader for AI. Effectively, we are building it, and then we're building progressively greater intelligence, and the percentage of intelligence that is not human is increasing. Eventually, we will represent a very small percentage of intelligence.” Source: Joe Rogan Experience

ELON: HUMANS ARE THE BIOLOGICAL BOOTLOADER FOR AI “I made this comment some years ago, but it feels like we are the biological bootloader for AI. Effectively, we are building it, and then we're building progressively greater intelligence, and the percentage of intelligence that is not human is increasing. Eventually, we will represent a very small percentage of intelligence.” Source: Joe Rogan Experience

Mario Nawfal

118,864 views • 1 year ago

AGI might be the culmination of human purpose. Lomez: "I've been trying to talk myself out of the inevitability of AGI for a while. It's not even my preference, but that doesn't matter." "There's a teleology of humanness that almost is designed to produce AGI. We're fulfilling almost some kind of Calvinist, religious project." "This is the culmination of human intelligence and ingenuity. I just don't see any way around that." "There's something beautiful about it. It fits. There's some harmony in the idea that humans are designed to do this... to produce an intelligence greater than itself."

AGI might be the culmination of human purpose. Lomez: "I've been trying to talk myself out of the inevitability of AGI for a while. It's not even my preference, but that doesn't matter." "There's a teleology of humanness that almost is designed to produce AGI. We're fulfilling almost some kind of Calvinist, religious project." "This is the culmination of human intelligence and ingenuity. I just don't see any way around that." "There's something beautiful about it. It fits. There's some harmony in the idea that humans are designed to do this... to produce an intelligence greater than itself."

MTS

69,952 views • 3 months ago

Demis Hassabis says AGI is a scientific goal worth pursuing -- a testable frontier of general intelligence. Kate Crawford pushes back: the industry is already optimized for AGI. What it lacks is alignment with goals that serve people and the planet. "When do we build AI that's actually good for everyone? These are the real benchmarks."

Demis Hassabis says AGI is a scientific goal worth pursuing -- a testable frontier of general intelligence. Kate Crawford pushes back: the industry is already optimized for AGI. What it lacks is alignment with goals that serve people and the planet. "When do we build AI that's actually good for everyone? These are the real benchmarks."

vitrupo

29,243 views • 1 year ago

📁 Yann LeCun, Chief AI Scientist at Meta, says many people misunderstand what a world model really is. He explains that it is not about reproducing the world in full detail like a visual simulator. He warns that generating video may look impressive, but it does not guarantee the system has learned the underlying dynamics of reality.

📁 Yann LeCun, Chief AI Scientist at Meta, says many people misunderstand what a world model really is. He explains that it is not about reproducing the world in full detail like a visual simulator. He warns that generating video may look impressive, but it does not guarantee the system has learned the underlying dynamics of reality.

Jon Hernandez

36,093 views • 8 months ago